Originally Posted by Topgoon
From a PCGamesn Interview, Swen said the following:

BG3 is based on the fifth edition [of D&D]. We started by setting out the ruleset very meticulously, and then seeing what worked and what didn’t work – because it is a videogame, and D&D was made to play as a tabletop game. So for the things that didn’t work, we came up with solutions.

The cool thing we found is that a lot of what makes D&D, D&D, actually survived the translation, so I think that if you like Dungeons and Dragons and you want to play BG3, you’re going to be happy.

If we are to believe Larian, then they did start with RAW, but made adjustments prior to making it into EA.

You can choose to assume that they are lying in that interview. However, if that is your position, that one: they are lying, and two: they never had any desire to implement 5e RAW, then realistically, it might be best to disengage until you see an in-game update from them that proves this position wrong.

It's not that I believe they are lying, Sven's statement just rises more questions than it answers.
How did they see it worked or didn't work? Did they implement every rule and class in the game? If I want to see if something works or not, I have to test it thoroughly. Or did they just test it on paper and thought - "oh, ok, that is probably not working in a vido game"?
If they implemented and tested everything in the game, why is it not in EA? If they did not implement everything and tested it, on what basis did they come to the conclusion something doesn't work?

For me that statements just doesnt add up.

Originally Posted by CopperCrate
On a related note, I do really love when people use "homebrew" as a pejorative. The entirety of roleplaying games descend from Dave Arneson's homebrew game Blackmoor and Gygax selling his homebrew version of Blackmoor as D&D. There may be DMs somewhere out there who only follow the rules of 5th Edition with zero deviations, but that's not the tradition. People have always adjusted the rules for their own games, whether they were PnP with three players or AAA games with 3 million. Larian's got every right to adjust the rules to suit their needs and some of us, as players, have every right to enjoy it. Whether or not other games have used different editions or implementations of the current edition doesn't deny them that right.

I think it was stated time and time again, that nobody who likes a more true 5e implementation is against homebrew stuff. It just needs to make sense.
If I imagine a situation like with some of the homebrew stuff Larian cooked up at a table, it would probably be rejected by most people (at least I play with). But thats what a Season 0 is for - to compromise on homebrew stuff. Right now we are in EA - kind of season 0 regarding the game, at least thats how I see it.

Session 0, not season 0

Last edited by daMichi; 11/02/21 05:02 PM.